[plug] all your XXX belong to us (was: valentine)

[Bernd Felsche]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 07:01:22AM +0800, Scott Middleton wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 23:42, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 22:37, Leon Brooks wrote:
> > > On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 20:47, Daniel Pearson wrote:
> > > > Found this.. thought it might make you all giggle:
> > > > http://zxvf.se/bilder/baselove3.jpg

> > > After reading this nice right-wing page...

> > >     http://www.australian-news.com.au/railway.htm

> > As a dedicated, entirely voluntary user of public transport and bike
> > paths - because of concerns about the cost, safety, etc of driving...
> > 
> > 	*jaw drops to floor*

> One thing they didn't mention was just how much money was going to be
> lost every year just on depreciation. The depreciation alone could fund
> free public transport by bus in Perth perpetually.

> It seemed like a good idea at the time but realistically after looking
> at the cost it now not worth it.

Population density is a major reason. And no; by that I don't mean
voters are thick!

Railways work really well on freight. They work really well on
long-haul, non-stop, high-speed passenger transport between
population centres.

It is not cost-effective to have 200 tonnes of train moving driver
and half a dozen pax between Kwinana and Mandurah at off-peak times.
To increase the number of pax-per-train you increase the time
between trains, which reduces their "convenience" so fewer will use
them...

This _is_ part of a flawed exercise in "social engineering".
Australia has committed to a reduction in motor vehicle deaths to a
rate of 3 in 100,000 population (a bogus metric) by this year IIRC,
so the only way in which that can be achieved is to move substantial
numbers out of cars (as the governments seems fit to continue to
issue licences to the inept and asocial) and onto rails; because bus
fatalities still count as road fatalities.

Another part of the social engineering is the "Vision zero" adopted
for road safety, which results in low speed limits being imposed so
that people crash more slowly and won't be killed when they crash.
That's all well and good; but ignores the observed fact that
artificially-low speeds induce a higher incidence of crashes so more
crashes occur; with an increase in the proportion of people
subjected to trauma.

But it's all good politics: reducing fatalities are always the
product of good government. Increasing fatalities are the result of
naughty drivers driving 8kmh over the 100kmh limit on a freeway
designed for a minimum safe speed of 130kmh.

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
 X   against HTML mail     | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \  and postings          | to help me spread!